Let's Riff on the next Tech/Social Revolution

[Hwen Hoshino]

It's what happens when you turn on BBC

So it means being informed of the facts then?

I like BBC documentaries, but why should i trust their news coverage?

[DBTrek]

JohnDonne would probably prefer Canader, but, we probably wouldn't take him, as, Canader actually in essence charges an entry fee, which, JohnDonne seems unlikely to be able to afford, since, he is a Bernie Bro, thus, unlikely to have much capital to invest.

That being said, once he was in, there is of course a guaranteed minimum income in effect, it's simply delivered in a very inefficient manner, same as it is in the USA.

Rather than have that byzantine complex of public sector unionized federal, state, and local social assistance programs that you do, it would save the American taxpayer billions, simply to tally all that up and cut him a cheque instead; "here ya go, now fuck off."

In the end, what's he going to do with it? Oh, spend it immediately in the local economy? Ah, win-win.

Indeed, a policy that's working like a charm for North Korea:

The economy is heavily nationalized.[268] Food and housing are extensively subsidized by the state; education and healthcare are free;[269] and the payment of taxes was officially abolished in 1974.[270] A variety of goods are available in department stores and supermarkets in Pyongyang,[271] though most of the population relies on small-scale jangmadang markets.[272][273] In 2009, the government attempted to stem the expanding free market by banning jangmadang and the use of foreign currency,[260] heavily devaluing the won and restricting the convertibility of savings in the old currency,[209] but the resulting inflation spike and rare public protests caused a reversal of these policies.[274] Private trade is dominated by women because most men are required to be present at their workplace, even though many state-owned enterprises are non-operational.[275]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Korea#Economy

. . . oh wait, wait, I get it. Our model will include crushing taxes on industry - which we'll have to magically rig somehow so they can't flee across the globe, and we won't require the recipients to show up to work anywhere. I bet those two minor differences will lead to completely different outcomes for us!

[doc_loliday]

I'm not really sold on the idea that people have nothing left to give and therefore can't work anymore. I'm pretty sure we have a really long way to go before we reach that point. We've definitely left the industrial era and we shouldn't want it back. A services economy employs an educated workforce, so we ought to offer higher education (I know, I know), so people can thrive if they choose. Anyway, it's not easy, but anybody can go to college these days, and more than likely for free. We need to hit the next stage, that is, most of the country comprised of (genuinely) educated people that work highly skilled jobs. We're not advanced enough to start sending out the checks.

[DBTrek]

Can you think of a more fitting beginning to a dystopian novel than this:

• In 2111 the American Government is faced with the realization that they can no longer afford to support an ever-increasing, non-productive, citizenry. Vowing to take swift, corrective action they hatch a plan to . . .

What the UIB people see as heaven is actually hell wearing a velvet glove.

[Speaker to Animals]

Can you think of a more fitting beginning to a dystopian novel than this:

• In 2111 the American Government is faced with the realization that they can no longer afford to support an ever-increasing, non-productive, citizenry. Vowing to take swift, corrective action they hatch a plan to . . .

What the UIB people see as heaven is actually hell wearing a velvet glove.

You need to present an alternative, dude.

[Speaker to Animals]

I'm not really sold on the idea that people have nothing left to give and therefore can't work anymore. I'm pretty sure we have a really long way to go before we reach that point. We've definitely left the industrial era and we shouldn't want it back. A services economy employs an educated workforce, so we ought to offer higher education (I know, I know), so people can thrive if they choose. Anyway, it's not easy, but anybody can go to college these days, and more than likely for free. We need to hit the next stage, that is, most of the country comprised of (genuinely) educated people that work highly skilled jobs. We're not advanced enough to start sending out the checks.

It isn't about *all* labor being automated. Enough of it will be that there will exist enough people who have no other options but to make war and other problems on the people who do. And that number will keep increasing.

[doc_loliday]

Something that never seems to get mentioned is how much people really hate going to work. Even people that make good money, generally really, really don't want to be there, and are solely there for that paycheck. There is an unfairness that will not be ignored. It takes decades of miserable, thankless, boring, and painful years to build a career, a career that is more than likely not even enjoyable. So, what do you say to them? Let's just take more of your check, and give it to people who value their time more than money? This won't go over well and I predict that the extent that we give money away is the extent that people choose not to work. Right here and right now in the USA, you can go to college for free, get a degree in a field that commands lots of money, if you're willing to make the sacrifices.

[DBTrek]

You need to present an alternative, dude.

I disagree.
A completely unethical, immoral, and unsustainable policy requires no alternative.
It is defunct solely upon its own premises.

[doc_loliday]

I think we have an alternative, it's the one we have right now. The one where if you bust your ass for years and years you can make something of yourself. People all around the world are trying to get here cus they know it.

[Speaker to Animals]

You need to present an alternative, dude.

I disagree.
A completely unethical, immoral, and unsustainable policy requires no alternative.
It is defunct solely upon its own premises.

Incorrect. We already have to face the fact that automation and globalization has reduced a sizable group of Americans to the status of not being able to work. There already are not enough jobs for every America, hence the massive increase in disability and welfare enrollments.

By refusing to present your own alternative to how to deal with this, you cast your lot with the present course, which is a massive welfare state, centralization, and government coercion.

You can't just wave your hand like the problem doesn't exist. It really does exist. It's not a huge problem now, but it will continue to grow each year.